Jharkhand Court July 2003 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Dwarika Prajapati Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-15-2003
Reported in: II(2004)DMC250
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. The present appeal arises against the judgment dated 20.12.1996 passed by 2nd Additional Session's Judge, Hazaribagh in Sessions Trial No. 173 of 1989 whereby the learned Trial Court convicted the appellant under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and sentenced him to undergo R,I. for 3 years under Section 498A, but no separate sentence was passed for the offence under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, By the said judgment, the learned Trial Court acquitted the other 4 accused persons, namely, Loknath Prajapati, Smt. Tetri Devi, Smt. Khagni Devi and Arjun Prajapati who were tried with the appellant.2. The prosecution case in brief is that Jayanti Devi, the daughter of the informant was married to the appellant Dwarika Prajapati. After 2 years of the marriage, the accused persons started torturing Jayanti Devi and demanded the money and jewelleries as dowry. It is said that the victim lady came to her paren...
Sudarshan Anand Vs. Bokaro Steel Plant and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-15-2003
Reported in: AIR2004Jhar84; [2004(1)JCR257(Jhr)]
ORDER1. The Steel Authority of India Limited, Bokaro Steel Plant as well as M/s. Hindustan Steel Construction Limited, Bokaro Steel City (for short HCCL) . together filed Case No. A/E 80/97, before the Estate Officer, Bokaro Steel City, the authority under Section 3 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act') for eviction of Sudarshan Anand, the appellant, from the quarters, which was under his occupation after the death of D.K. Roy, an employee of H.S.C.L. who died in harness and thereafter his name was struck off from the rolls on 2.11.1995.2. The appellant claims himself to be the nephew/legal heir of deceased O.K. Roy and is continuing in occupation of the said quarter, which he ought to have vacated within four months' of the death of the deceased-employee. Possession of the appellant from 29.3.1996 was unauthorized and he was liable for eviction under the 1971 Act.3. He contested the case filed under Section ...
State of Jharkhand and ors. Vs. Bharat Drilling and Foundation Treatme ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-14-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)ARBLR127(Jhar); 2003(3)BLJR1971; [2003(3)JCR269(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. These appeals under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is directed against the judgments and orders dated 8.1.02 passed by Sub-Judge, Hazaribagh in Miscellaneous (Arbitration) Case No. 2/2001. 3/2001 and 4/2001 whereby he had dismissed the objections filed by the appellant under Section 34 of the said Act and refused to set aside the awards.2. The brief facts of the case in MA 4 of 2002 are that in response to a notice inviting tender by the appellant the respondent claimant submitted tender for the work of construction of residuary work under Bhairwa Reservoirs scheme and the work was awarded to the respondent and an agreement was drawn on 3.7.1991. Although the construction works started but it could not be completed within the extended period because of various reasons. The parties inter alia alleged their failure in performing their reciprocal obligations. Ultimately dispute arose between the parties and the claimant respondent moved this Cour...
Mrs. Praveena Choudhary Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-14-2003
Reported in: [2003(3)JCR261(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqabal, J.1. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for grant of time bound promotion/scale which is said to be due since 1.1.94 and also grant of consequential benefits.2. Petitioner's case is that on 1.9.84 she joined as lady Supervisor and completed 10 years of service on 1.9.94. According to the petitioner, she is entitled to get time bound promotion on completion of 10 years with effect from 1.9.94 with all other consequential promotional benefits. Respondents on the other hand contended in the counter affidavit that in view of Clause 11 of the resolution of the Finance Department dated 8th February, 1999, promotion given by 31.12.1995 will not be taken into consideration, because of the implementation of the revised pay scale. It is contended, that if an employee possess requisite qualification and eligible for promotion to the next higher grade and if option is given for new pay scale then the employee has no right to claim for promotion to the next higher grade...
Ram Chhabila Singh Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-14-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ1334; [2003(3)JCR741(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. The appellant has filed the present appeal against the judgment dated 15.3.1997 passed by the Special Judge, Gumla in G.R. No. 4 of 1988 whereby the learned Special Judge convicted the appellant finding him guilty under Section 7(1)(a)(ii) of the Essential Commodities Act and had sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for the period of three months and to pay a fine of Rs. 700/- and in default of payment of fine he shall further undergo simple imprisonment for one month. 2. The prosecution case in short is that one Anil Prasad Keshari (PW 1) lodged FIR on 13.6.1988 in the Chainpur Police Station alleging that 10 bags of wheat were being unloaded from a tractor in the flour mill of Nand Kishore Agarwal. It was further alleged that the wheat was being unloaded by the contractor i.e. appellant and the driver of the tractor. The informant suspected that the said wheat was meant for distribution amongst the labourers or for sale through fair price shop. On the b...
Mohammad Wase Khan Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-14-2003
Reported in: [2003(3)JCR515(Jhr)]
Tapen Sen, J. 1. In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order of dismissal dated 27.4.1996 passed by the respondent No. 5 as contained in Annexure 12. The petitioner has further prayed for quashing the order dated 11.10.1996 which is contained in Annexure 14 and which has been passed by the appellate authority (respondent No. 4) rejecting the appeal and upholding the order dated 27.4.1996. The petitioner also prays for quashing of the order dated 20.1.1998 as contained in Annexure 17 and which has been passed by the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 (Director General of Police and Inspector General of Police) rejecting the Memorial filed by the petitioner. 2. Mr. H. Waris, learned counsel for the petitioner has raised a very short point in this case. He firstly drew attention of this Court to Annexure 9/1 which is the Enquiry Report and submitted that the Enquiry Officer did not find the petitioner guilty. Thereafter, by Annexure 10 the petitioner was reinstated ...
Sudhir Singh and ors. Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-14-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ1073; [2003(3)JCR513(Jhr)]
Deoki Nandan Prasad, J.1. This appeal has been directed against the judgment, of conviction and order of sentence dated 4.1.1996 passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Giridih in Sessions Trial No. 321 of 1993, whereby and whereunder the learned trial Court convicted the appellants under Section 436 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years each. The learned trial Court further convicted the appellants Sudhir Singh, Ruplal Modak alias Rupu Modak, Kashi Hazam and Kailash Thakur under Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years whereas appellants Mitlal Rajak and Niranjan Modak were also convicted under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. However, the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. The prosecution case in brief is that on 21.1.1991 at about 11.30 p.m., the informant Choukidar Lakhan Turi lodged t...
Tej Narayan Pandey and ors., Vs. Coal India Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-14-2003
Reported in: 2003(51)BLJR1802; [2003(4)JCR81(Jhr)]
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. 1. As all these cases relate to upgradation of Senior Foremen/Senior Overmen to higher E-I Grade, common order dated 30th June, 2001 passed by the Director (Personnel), Bharat Coking Coal Ltd., Dhanbad (for short B.C.C.L.) is under challenge and common question of law raised, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The petitioners who were incharge Foremen, some of them moved before this Court in CWJC No. 1715 of 2001 (Tej Narayan Pandey and Ors. v. Coal India Ltd. and Ors.) for direction on the respondents to implement the circular No. D(P) Secy./FS/25 dated 20th February, 1987, whereby the policy decision taken in the meeting of the Chairman-cum-Managing Directors of Subsidiary Coal Companies of Coal India Ltd. (for short CIL), including B.C.C.L. for upgradation of Senior Foremen/Senior Overmen with seven years experience to the executive level of E-1 post on the basis of A.C.Rs. and interviews were communicated.3. This Cour...
Paburas Toppo and anr. and Kishore Bage Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkh ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-14-2003
Reported in: [2003(4)JCR637(Jhr)]
Deoki Nandan Prasad, J.Both the appeals heard together as they are arisen out of the same judgment and are being disposed of by this common judgment.1. All the three appellants have been convicted under Section 324/34, IPC whereas appellant Nos. 1 and 2 (Paburas Toppo and Epil Hembrom) have further been convicted for the offence under Section 325/34, IPC and appellant Nos. 1 and 2 were sentenced to undergo R.I. for five years each under Section 325; IPC and fine of Rs. Two hundred and in default of fine, R.I. for two months each whereas all the appellants including Kishore Bage were sentenced to undergo R.I. for two years each under Section 324/34, IPC.2. The Prosecution case, in brief, is that a written report was submitted by one Habil Soren alleging therein that on 17.11.1990 at about 9.30 p.m., the accused persons who are the students of Epifani Boys Hostel, assaulted Sneh Masih Dhan and Bardan Topno as a result of which both of them became seriously injured. It is further alleged ...
Manoj Kumar Sah Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-14-2003
Reported in: [2004(1)JCR248(Jhr)]
ORDER1. The appellant claimed to have been appointed as Assistant Teacher in Koreiva Mission Primary School, Dumka in the year 1995 by the Managing Committee of the School after following the procedure prescribed therefor. Thereafter his appointment was sent for approval before the District Superintendent of Education, Dumka.2. In course of approval process the Director, Primary Education found that the diploma training certificate was obtained by him from the All India Education Society, Calcutta, which was not recognized institution by the State Government and as such the certificate of the said institution for the purpose of employment can also not be recognized.3. In this regard the District. Superintendent of Education sent communication dated 9.9.1999 to the Secretary of the School with a direction to consider the matter and take a resolution in the Managing Committee for removal of the appellant from service. The Secretary was also directed to send a copy of such resolution to t...
- ‹ Prev
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- Next ›
- Last »